A new image of the future Mets ballpark can be seen here: linky (http://www.ballparksofbaseball.com/future/MetsBallpark.htm)

It looks like the Anti-Shea. Not sure what to think of it.

Hangar18

03-28-2006, 12:19 PM

Hmmmm. Ebbetts Fields meets Camden Yards, with a nod to USCellullar Field (the Roof is exactly like our roof)

Not very original.

Hangar18

03-28-2006, 12:25 PM

The Jokes over already. Someone needs to let the METS know that
THEY ARE NOT THE BROOKLYN DODGERS/NY GIANTS.
Next to the Cubs, Brewers, Marlins, Pirates .....The Mets are an embarrassment

itsnotrequired

03-28-2006, 12:27 PM

Hmmmm. Ebbetts Fields meets Camden Yards, with a nod to USCellullar Field (the Roof is exactly like our roof)

Not very original.

The roof isn't exactly the same as The Cell. The Cell roof is column supported while this one is cantalivered.

Huge difference.:tongue:

Baby Fisk

03-28-2006, 12:27 PM

Not very original.
Agreed. I like the Mets but am struggling to find something nice to say about this park. It definitely looks like Camden Yards at first glance, right down to the positioning of the scoreboard. Not sure what's going on in the RF concourse, but it looks like an open area for fans. Those UD seats in LF look high and steep. Not a charming ballpark, lots of repetition of other buildings. This place actually SHOULD have blue seats. The Mets deserve better than this.

Baby Fisk

03-28-2006, 12:29 PM

The Jokes over already. Someone needs to let the METS know that
THEY ARE NOT THE BROOKLYN DODGERS/NY GIANTS.
Next to the Cubs, Brewers, Marlins, Pirates .....The Mets are an embarrassment
The Mets were created in 1962 as a REPLACEMENT to the Dodgers and Giants. That's why their original colours were Dodger Blue and Giant Orange. They can (rightfully?) claim some ancestry to those teams. But the Ebbets Field thing makes no sense, I agree there. Ebbets Field was not in Flushing!

MiamiSpartan

03-28-2006, 12:57 PM

Well, at least it's a huge improvement over Shea.

Hawkeroo1980

03-28-2006, 01:27 PM

The Jokes over already. Someone needs to let the METS know that
THEY ARE NOT THE BROOKLYN DODGERS/NY GIANTS.
Next to the Cubs, Brewers, Marlins, Pirates .....The Mets are an embarrassment

I gotta disagree.......

Brewers will make some noise this year and might actually be buyers rather than sellers in june.

Mets spend the cash....just not wisely.

pirates ARE a joke, i agree

Marlins.....two world series' in 10 years ---not too shabby, regardless of firesales

1. The Mets have no released images of their park yet. The link posted used to have photos from models the Mets made in 01 when they were trying to get a new park, but they were not of this model. While this photo MAY be legit, I doubt it. Why would this website have a rendering of the park before the Mets premiere it to the world? I believe the sketches of the new park will be revealed within the next month.

2. Leave it to Hangar to recycle tired arguements. I do not particularly like this park, but it is good. It resembles Oriole Park a little too much, which is part of the reason I think that photo is a fake. The ONLY thing about the park that will resemble Ebbets is the exterior. The dimensions are different, and there is no upperdeck in centerfield. They are not rebuilding Ebbets, they are modelling the exterior of this park after Ebbets. We have gone over this before. The Mets aren't trying to steal Dodgers' history, they are paying tribute to the old Dodgers fans who spent their childhoods in Ebbets, which is widely considered one of the best parks ever. It will look nothing at all like Ebbets from the inside, and I have no problem with that.

Hangar18

03-28-2006, 04:00 PM

The Mets aren't trying to steal Dodgers' history, they are paying tribute to the old Dodgers fans who spent their childhoods in Ebbets, which is widely considered one of the best parks ever. It will look nothing at all like Ebbets from the inside, and I have no problem with that.

It should be the DODGERS who pay tribute to old Dodger history, NOT the Mets.
Same goes for the Brewers. They need to stop paying "tribute" to the Braves. Atlanta should be doing that, not Milwaukee

My comments are only "recycled" because the Mets keep coming with the same stuff. They get the same comments until they start making their own history

SouthSide_HitMen

03-28-2006, 04:26 PM

It should be the DODGERS who pay tribute to old Dodger history, NOT the Mets.
Same goes for the Brewers. They need to stop paying "tribute" to the Braves. Atlanta should be doing that, not Milwaukee

My comments are only "recycled" because the Mets keep coming with the same stuff. They get the same comments until they start making their own history

Well they won 2 World Series in my lifetime. The White Sox finally won one last year. That is the kind of history I am looking for. The new Comiskey is not historic but it finally looks half way decent.

Anything is an improvement to Shea. As long as they have enough lower level seats (seats are not pushed to far back for 15 levels of skyboxes) it should be fine. They will still have the damn airport next door.

I think Minaya needs to be given a chance to do his job. He has been there for one full season. It took Kenny 5 years to build his team. I think the Mets will be a World Series contender before the end of the decade though I don't expect it this season. They need to start rebuilding the farm system from all the trades which got them to respectability (2005 & 2006). The new mega cable deal will help as well.

palehozenychicty

03-28-2006, 04:31 PM

Anything is an improvement to Shea. As long as they have enough lower level seats (seats are not pushed to far back for 15 levels of skyboxes) it should be fine. They will still have the damn airport next door.

I think Minaya needs to be given a chance to do his job. He has been there for one full season. It took Kenny 5 years to build his team. I think the Mets will be a World Series contender before the end of the decade though I don't expect it this season. They need to start rebuilding the farm system from all the trades which got them to respectability (2005 & 2006). The new mega cable deal will help as well.

Shea IS a garbage stadium, so I don't know why people are hating, as anything would be an improvement. But in the postseason, coupled with JFK, that place gets defeaning.

batmanZoSo

03-28-2006, 05:27 PM

Thank god they're not going with this anymore:

http://ballparks.com/baseball/national/nymbpk02.jpg

We have enough depressing domes, we don't need a depressing, ugly dome. They sure like that Ebbets Field facade, though--you can see it in both models.

This new one is a spitting image of Camden Yards though. Still looks nice, but come on...

http://www.ballparksofbaseball.com/future/metsmain.jpg
Mets

http://www.mdstad.com/images/projects/oriolepark.jpg

Balmer

edit: The Mets park on a second glance might even look more like Texas especially in left field--more so than Oriole Park--in size and height of the grandstand. Plus, they have the grass batter's eye, which I always thought was cool in Texas. I would've preferred something like that over the cluttered fan deck at the cell, but I digress...

Hangar18

03-28-2006, 05:39 PM

Well they won 2 World Series in my lifetime. The White Sox finally won one last year. That is the kind of history I am looking for. The new Comiskey is not historic but it finally looks half way decent.

Anything is an improvement to Shea. As long as they have enough lower level seats (seats are not pushed to far back for 15 levels of skyboxes) it should be fine. They will still have the damn airport next door.

I think Minaya needs to be given a chance to do his job. He has been there for one full season. It took Kenny 5 years to build his team. I think the Mets will be a World Series contender before the end of the decade though I don't expect it this season. They need to start rebuilding the farm system from all the trades which got them to respectability (2005 & 2006). The new mega cable deal will help as well.

the Mets have enough of a fanbase and history that they dont have to be borrowing everyone else's (ala a certain team 8 miles north)
Go back to the simple pinstriped blue and orange uniforms, lose the alternate jerseys, lose the black, build a stadium NOT MODELED after another teams stadium, and watch how MetLove flourishes among the fanbase. They are a team trying to be everything else instead of themselves.

RKMeibalane

03-28-2006, 07:16 PM

It should be the DODGERS who pay tribute to old Dodger history, NOT the Mets.
Same goes for the Brewers. They need to stop paying "tribute" to the Braves. Atlanta should be doing that, not Milwaukee

My comments are only "recycled" because the Mets keep coming with the same stuff. They get the same comments until they start making their own history

Two World Championships isn't enough history for you? Having one of the dominant teams of the 1980's isn't enough? And what's wrong with the Mets wanting to pay tribute to the New York teams of the past? The Dodgers and Giants have all but ignored their pre-Calfornia history. If the Mets- as an existing New York team- want to pay tribute to others that have played in their city, I don't see the problem with that.

WhiteSoxFan84

03-28-2006, 07:22 PM

I kinda like it.

paciorek1983

03-28-2006, 07:40 PM

Whether this is really the design or not, I like the exterior. I've always loved the exterior look of Ebbets Field. Too bad I wasn't around to see the real thing. I actually wish someone would have done this sooner. I would like to see the rest of the design changed somewhat, as it does look like a copy of Camden Yards otherwise.

Who cares if the idea is not that original? Copying is a major form of flattery.:wink:

paciorek1983

03-28-2006, 07:41 PM

I kinda like it.

yep.:D:

SouthSide_HitMen

03-28-2006, 07:50 PM

the Mets have enough of a fanbase and history that they dont have to be borrowing everyone else's (ala a certain team 8 miles north)
Go back to the simple pinstriped blue and orange uniforms, lose the alternate jerseys, lose the black, build a stadium NOT MODELED after another teams stadium, and watch how MetLove flourishes among the fanbase. They are a team trying to be everything else instead of themselves.

Pinstripe uniforms (blue and orange) - Agree totally.

(they went with the marketing suits telling them black jerseys sell best).

As far as the stadium, they are designed by 2 or 3 firms and most of them look the same. There is only so many ways you can make a ballpark. What I care most about are seats being close to the field (which is why the UC sucks compared to the Stadium for any seats above the $75 threshhold)) and grass. You should try to get a good view (i.e. of downtown like Busch or PNC - which I thought was the biggest mistake of Comiskey Park II) if possible though at Shea you have junk car part places east and the US Open facility South and nothing north or west to view.

I have no problem with the Ebbets field exterior. Our exterior sucks yet I don't care as I only see it for five minutes between walking from the el and entering the ballpark.

I have no problem with the Ebbets field exterior. Our exterior sucks yet I don't care as I only see it for five minutes between walking from the el and entering the ballpark.

Iquote]

What is it that you don't like about our exterior? I like the arched windows, but I wish that they would have gone with a different color. They should have used the arches as walkways and ramps and also had a way to see the inside of the park from the outside of the windows.

SouthSide_HitMen

03-28-2006, 09:38 PM

What is it that you don't like about our exterior? I like the arched windows, but I wish that they would have gone with a different color. They should have used the arches as walkways and ramps and also had a way to see the inside of the park from the outside of the windows.

I guess sucks was too harsh a word. The award winning buildings at UIC suck. The exterior at Comiskey Park II is bland, I also don't like the color or the ramp across the street. It is cold and uninviting.

I think the park would have been better facing downtown (home plate near 37th and Shields). Most fans do not use the "main entrance" on 35th and Shields (reserved for suite holders). I love the changes they have made inside over the years.

paciorek1983

03-28-2006, 10:52 PM

I guess sucks was too harsh a word. The award winning buildings at UIC suck. The exterior at Comiskey Park II is bland, I also don't like the color or the ramp across the street. It is cold and uninviting.

I think the park would have been better facing downtown (home plate near 37th and Shields). Most fans do not use the "main entrance" on 35th and Shields (reserved for suite holders). I love the changes they have made inside over the years.

Yeah, I see your points. I love what they've done on the inside of the park as well, but the outside needs some work. I think the backside of the ballpark(the part facing the expy) needs alot of help. Talk about uninviting. That part is viewed by thousands everyday, and it looks awful.:(:

Brian26

03-28-2006, 10:56 PM

Two World Championships isn't enough history for you? Having one of the dominant teams of the 1980's isn't enough? And what's wrong with the Mets wanting to pay tribute to the New York teams of the past? The Dodgers and Giants have all but ignored their pre-Calfornia history. If the Mets- as an existing New York team- want to pay tribute to others that have played in their city, I don't see the problem with that.

I always thought it was cool that the Mets hats were essentially a combination of the blue Brooklyn Dodgers hat and the orange "NY" of the New York Giants hat. They should go back to that soon too.

Brian26

03-28-2006, 10:58 PM

Yeah, I see your points. I love what they've done on the inside of the park as well, but the outside needs some work. I think the backside of the ballpark(the part facing the expy) needs alot of help. Talk about uninviting. That part is viewed by thousands everyday, and it looks awful.:(:

It looks fine. I mean, what's is supposed to look like? I think it's a nice touch that they've added the flag behind one of the billboards, and I like the "2005 World Champions" sign on one of the other billboards. The park looks tremendous. And this is corny, but I like that the 35th Street bridge across the expressway says "HOME-OF-THE-CHICAGO-WHITESOX".

TheOldRoman

03-28-2006, 11:47 PM

Two World Championships isn't enough history for you? Having one of the dominant teams of the 1980's isn't enough? And what's wrong with the Mets wanting to pay tribute to the New York teams of the past? The Dodgers and Giants have all but ignored their pre-Calfornia history. If the Mets- as an existing New York team- want to pay tribute to others that have played in their city, I don't see the problem with that.
Exactly. The Mets are not paying tribute to Dodgers history, they are paying tribute to NEW YORK history, or more specifically, Brooklyn history (which is still all Mets fans). This isn't like if the Royals built a new version of Ebbets in the middle of KC. This isn't like moving the London Bridge to Arizona. This is paying tribute to what once stood in New York. It would have been nice to see some characteristics of Polo Grounds included, but it wasn't the great park Ebbets was. The only distinguishing quality Polo Grounds had was the ridiculous (but cool) dimensions, but there is no way any team would recreate that.

The Mets have their own history. They have a history that, other than their inaugeral year and their current uniforms, has been proud. However, they cannot deny their past. They cannot ignore where they come from. The Mets were created BECAUSE the Dodgers and Giants left town. It will always be their legacy, just like the new Cleveland Browns.

As I said before to you before, Hangar, if the Sox left town in 89 and we got a new team in 95, would you be up in arms if the park resembled Comiskey? Would the new south side team be a joke because they payed tribute to the park in which its fans grew up? No, you would think it was cool, and it would be. Like I said earlier, they aren't recreating Ebbets. The outside mimics that of Ebbets. That is the extent of the re-creation. The insides are nothing alike.

paciorek1983

03-28-2006, 11:57 PM

It looks fine. I mean, what's is supposed to look like? I think it's a nice touch that they've added the flag behind one of the billboards, and I like the "2005 World Champions" sign on one of the other billboards. The park looks tremendous. And this is corny, but I like that the 35th Street bridge across the expressway says "HOME-OF-THE-CHICAGO-WHITESOX".

I would rather have an arched windows design, lie the rest of the park instead of the lattice design.

But, since it is the lattice design and bilboards, I would rather the signs be more dimensional instead of just flat. I am a sign geek and I hate flat signs.

PKalltheway

03-29-2006, 01:00 AM

The park is fine. Anything is an improvement over Shea.

SouthSide_HitMen

03-29-2006, 01:23 AM

This isn't like if the Royals built a new version of Ebbets in the middle of KC. This isn't like moving the London Bridge to Arizona.

I like the new Mets ballpark, the exterior looks really cool. The only thing that does not look right is the green seats, dark blue would fit the Metropolitans better.

BnzCP

03-29-2006, 10:41 AM

Well, at least it's a huge improvement over Shea.

Almost anything is better then Shea...I hate that park.

batmanZoSo

03-29-2006, 11:10 AM

It looks fine. I mean, what's is supposed to look like? I think it's a nice touch that they've added the flag behind one of the billboards, and I like the "2005 World Champions" sign on one of the other billboards. The park looks tremendous. And this is corny, but I like that the 35th Street bridge across the expressway says "HOME-OF-THE-CHICAGO-WHITESOX".

I like that bridge thing, too. And I like the park a lot. From the inside it looks great, but from the expressway, it looks like crap. Those billboards have got to go, period.

As if the billboards weren't bad enough, they have those big obnoxious signs on the back of them. You got an ad, a comically large American flag and a very cheap-looking tribute to the World Champs. Honestly, it's been 88 years--are white, painted on block letters the best they can do?

You can't SEE into the park at all and it doesn't look attractive from the outside. That's the problem. You go to other cities and your jaw drops when you drive by their stadiums. Ours, you just see enormous billboards and maybe a few green seats poking through the lattice. You want to improve the atmosphere and attraction of the park? Open it up. Get rid of the stupid billboards.

paciorek1983

03-29-2006, 06:24 PM

I like that bridge thing, too. And I like the park a lot. From the inside it looks great, but from the expressway, it looks like crap. Those billboards have got to go, period.

As if the billboards weren't bad enough, they have those big obnoxious signs on the back of them. You got an ad, a comically large American flag and a very cheap-looking tribute to the World Champs. Honestly, it's been 88 years--are white, painted on block letters the best they can do?

You can't SEE into the park at all and it doesn't look attractive from the outside. That's the problem. You go to other cities and your jaw drops when you drive by their stadiums. Ours, you just see enormous billboards and maybe a few green seats poking through the lattice. You want to improve the atmosphere and attraction of the park? Open it up. Get rid of the stupid billboards.

Yeah, the billboards have got to go. But if they are going to keep them and the lattice, then spice it up! Otherwise, I think that my idea of having the arched windows would look pretty cool, and the inside of the park would be very visible.

Railsplitter

03-29-2006, 07:12 PM

What have the Mets done but rip off New York's other teams?
Giant's "NY"+ Dodger Blue+ Yankee pinstripes = Mets initial unis. From time to time they even had the block "New York" on their road uniforms similar to the Yankees road outfits. Thier first four managers (Casey Stengel, Wes Westrum, Gil Hodges, and Yogi Berra) all had ties to other nNew Yorks teams as well.

Baby Fisk

03-30-2006, 09:08 AM

What have the Mets done but rip off New York's other teams?
Giant's "NY"+ Dodger Blue+ Yankee pinstripes = Mets initial unis. From time to time they even had the block "New York" on their road uniforms similar to the Yankees road outfits. Thier first four managers (Casey Stengel, Wes Westrum, Gil Hodges, and Yogi Berra) all had ties to other nNew Yorks teams as well.
Not to mention the current one!

The more I look at that design, the less I like it. It's Camden Freakin Yards plunked down next to LaGuardia. I hope this gets radically revised before being built.

batmanZoSo

03-30-2006, 09:46 AM

Not to mention the current one!

The more I look at that design, the less I like it. It's Camden Freakin Yards plunked down next to LaGuardia. I hope this gets radically revised before being built.

That A's proposed ballpark is stunning. I don't know how they can create a gem like that and then a lame rip-off like this (assuming both are HOK creations, and most parks are nowadays).

doublem23

03-30-2006, 10:00 AM

I like this one.

Baby Fisk

03-30-2006, 10:05 AM

That A's proposed ballpark is stunning. I don't know how they can create a gem like that and then a lame rip-off like this (assuming both are HOK creations, and most parks are nowadays).
Maybe it's time for HOK to "take a time out" and give another firm the chance to stun the world. They are definitely repeating themselves.